Soft on Sharpton

December 20, 2000

https://www.smartertimes.com/275/soft-on-sharpton

The New York Times runs on the front of its metro section today an article reporting on a step toward a mayoral race by the Rev. Al Sharpton. The article offers an extraordinary insight into the way the Times treats racial demagoguery.

"Although he won strong support in his 1997 race for mayor, Mr. Sharpton is still viewed by some New Yorkers as a highly controversial figure," the Times article says. Talk about euphemism and careful hedging. It would be more accurate for the Times to say that Rev. Sharpton is a highly controversial figure, because he is viewed by some New Yorkers as having engaged in racial demagoguery.

"But in recent years, he has reached out to a wider political spectrum, and has won acclaim for his role in leading protests after the killing of Amadou Diallo, an unarmed man who was shot early last year by police officers who fired 41 bullets at him as he stood in the vestibule of his Bronx apartment building," the Times reports. Note the passive construction: "has won acclaim." "Has won acclaim" from whom? From the knee-jerk liberals at the Times, perhaps, but not from supporters of the police or from Mayor Giuliani, who saw Rev. Sharpton's protests as an attempt to fan anti-police sentiment and exploit racial divisiveness in the city.

The Times omits entirely Rev. Sharpton's role in the aftermath of the anti-Semitic Crown Heights riots, in which he railed against "diamond merchants." And it omits entirely his role denouncing "white interlopers" -- Jews -- who owned a record store in Harlem that was later burned to the ground in a fire that killed eight.

Finally, the Times quotes, without comment, Rev. Sharpton's comment, "How do we fight back with George Bush in the White House when we know that federal investigations will not be so easy to get?" This comment is newsworthy in itself, suggesting as it does that someone with Rev. Sharpton's track record now finds it "easy" to bring federal investigations down on New York City. But the New York Times doesn't seem interested in investigating politically motivated Justice Department investigations of the New York Police Department, only in rehabilitating Rev. Sharpton.

Stancik Watch: A story in the metro section of today's New York Times reports that the special commissioner of investigation for New York City Schools, Edward Stancik, "denied rumors in education circles that he would leave his job." The Times apparently finds this piece of news so important that it sees fit to report it again, on the education page of today's paper. The education page says "people familiar with Mr. Stancik's thinking said he would stay," and it further says that "At a news conference yesterday, Mr. Stancik denied that he was leaving." Well, if Mr. Stancik himself says he is staying, what's the need for the sentence referring to "people familiar with Mr. Stancik's thinking"? Given the Times's editorial voicing concern for those redwood trees in California, you'd think the editors would have seized an opportunity to save some paper here.

Temple Mount: A news story in the international section of today's New York Times offers this account of Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem: "The Palestinian uprising began in late September after Mr. Sharon made a heavily guarded visit to the plaza outside Al Aksa, the important mosque in the contested holy center of Jerusalem, to assert Israeli sovereignty over the area." The Times doesn't even mention that what it refers to as "the plaza outside Al Aksa" is also the top of the Temple Mount, Judaism's holiest site.

Note: Technical difficulties prevented updates to the Smartertimes Web site for the past few days. The Saturday, Sunday and Monday issues are available for those who missed them.

receive the latest by email: subscribe to the free smartertimes.com mailing list